[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 00/31] Support VFD and DPDK PF + kernel VF on i40e

[Iremonger, Bernard]

Hi Andrew,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Iremonger, Bernard
> Sent: Friday, December 2, 2016 10:59 AM
> To: Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko at solarflare.com>; Lu, Wenzhuo
> <wenzhuo.lu at intel.com>; dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 00/31] Support VFD and DPDK PF + kernel VF
> on i40e
> 
> Hi Andrew,
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Andrew
> Rybchenko
> > Sent: Friday, December 2, 2016 9:00 AM
> > To: Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo.lu at intel.com>; dev at dpdk.org
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 00/31] Support VFD and DPDK PF + kernel
> > VF on i40e
> >
> > On 12/02/2016 03:11 AM, Wenzhuo Lu wrote:
> > > 1, VF Daemon (VFD)
> > > VFD is an idea to control all the VFs from PF.
> > > As we need to support the scenario kernel PF + DPDK VF, DPDK follows
> > > the interface between kernel PF + kernel VF. We don't want to
> > > introduce too many new messages between PF and VF. So this patch set
> > > adds some new APIs to control VFs directly from PF.
> > > The new APIs include,
> > > 1) set VF MAC anti-spoofing
> > > 2) set VF VLAN anti-spoofing
> > > 3) set TX loopback
> > > 4) set VF unicast promiscuous mode
> > > 5) set VF multicast promiscuous mode
> > > 6) set VF MTU
> > > 7) get/reset VF stats
> > > 8) set VF MAC address
> > > 9) set VF VLAN stripping
> > > 10) VF VLAN insertion
> > > 12) set VF broadcast mode
> > > 12) set VF VLAN tag
> > > 13) set VF VLAN filter
> > > VFD also includes VF to PF mailbox message management by APP. When
> > > PF receives mailbox messages from VF, PF should call the callback
> > > provided by APP to know if they're permitted to be processed.
> >
> > The patch series adds i40e-specific API functions for VF control
> > (advertise link status change, MAC anti-spoofing, VLAN anti-spoofing,
> > promiscuous mode, MAC change, VLAN controls), but RTE API is added to
> > get VF stats. I'm wondering why.
> > Corresponding patches do not explain why i40e-specific API is added
> > instead of generic RTE API. IMHO, it is hardly convenient for applications.
> > (I guess it was a discussion and decision, but I've failed to find in the
> archive).
> >
> > Andrew.
> 
> There was a discussion previously in DPDK 16.11 about this approach being
> used for the ixgbe PMD.
> I have attached the email thread.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Bernard.

The attached email did not get through for some reason. Here is a link to the email archive.


http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-September/047786.html

Regards,

Bernard.